• Welcome to New Hampshire Underground.
 

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Main Menu

breaking the prostitution law

Started by mackler, May 25, 2008, 01:55 AM NHFT

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2
User actions

liftsboxes

#15
June 28, 2009, 10:03 AM NHFT
If I get a jersy with "Fred Garvin" on the back, do you think anyone will get it?

CJS

#16
June 28, 2009, 10:47 AM NHFT
That was a funny skit ... remember his truss ?

Tim L

#17
July 03, 2009, 09:21 AM NHFT
Holy crap !!! I was out of work last winter and my wife paid the bills.I'm a prostitute !!! Well no sense putting it off I better turn myself in,but wait, if I collected unemployment is the govt. guilty of pandering?

Humorrhoid

#18
July 03, 2009, 02:26 PM NHFT
Definition of marriage:

A public proclamation of a private intention.

Based on that,isn't it prostitution equally means with the same?

mackler

#19
August 30, 2009, 11:19 AM NHFT
After a bit of analysis, I have concluded that the State does not have a problem with prostitution, so long as the prostitute has only one client and vice-versa.

Kat Kanning

#20
August 30, 2009, 06:10 PM NHFT
You refer, of course, to a man and his lawyer.

FreelanceFreedomFighter

#21
August 30, 2009, 07:47 PM NHFT
Quote from: Kat Kanning on August 30, 2009, 06:10 PM NHFT
You refer, of course, to a man and his lawyer.

:laughing4: ROTFLMAOOL!!!!!  :rofl:

That was WONDERFUL Kat... I haven't laughed that hard in quite awhile...
I'm going to be sharing that with my daughter, the lawyer!

KBCraig

#22
August 31, 2009, 01:56 AM NHFT
Quote from: mackler on August 30, 2009, 11:19 AM NHFT
After a bit of analysis, I have concluded that the State does not have a problem with prostitution, so long as the prostitute has only one client and vice-versa.

And I have concluded that a surprise brand-new laptop can purchase some wonderful favors of a prurient nature.  ;D >:D ;D

mackler

#23
September 14, 2009, 09:14 AM NHFT
Quote from: Kat Kanning on August 30, 2009, 06:10 PM NHFT
You refer, of course, to a man and his lawyer.

Actually, I was referring to a man and his wife.

Lex

#24
September 14, 2009, 01:30 PM NHFT
I was reading through some of the other RSAs in the Criminal Code and found this:

Quote
633:5 Peonage. –
    I. An actor is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if such person knowingly holds a victim in a condition of involuntary servitude in satisfaction of a debt owed to the actor. In this section, ""involuntary servitude'' means a condition of servitude in which the victim is forced to work for the actor by the use or threat of physical restraint or physical injury, or by the use or threat of coercion through law or the legal process.
    II. The use of the labor of any person incarcerated in a state or county correctional facility or municipal jail shall be exempt from this section.

I wonder if both paragraphs were written at the same time or if it was just paragraph I and then later some bureaucrat realized the issue and added paragraph II.

Humorrhoid

#25
September 14, 2009, 02:22 PM NHFT
Quote from: mackler on August 30, 2009, 11:19 AM NHFT
After a bit of analysis, I have concluded that the State does not have a problem with prostitution, so long as the prostitute has only one client and vice-versa.
:P
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2
User actions